Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Guys,   Following in from my 17 page thread, that dates back over ten years, I am starting a new thread, at the suggestion of the site team. My issue relates the a) service charges relating to the Leasehold flat I bought back in 2006 b) a Managing Agent who is of questionable abilities as a manager of our block of flats. The Managing Agent has claimed £6k in fees to which (I think, as does the new Landlord) he was not entitled. I am wanting to get it back, and/or the fees on my account calculating properly which would leave me with a credit balance.  I am recently in receipt of a 4th claim relating to this dispute, with two of the previous three going 'no where'. The other one they won in default on 2011, but I successfully had that set-aside.They have not given me the money back though. It all started due to poor management of the block, and it transpired upon scrutiny that the management arrangements appear to be unenforceable prior to 2014. It's very complicated. This information is required simply posted, and not as a PDF, so here goes:   1.       BlurredFX Service Charge Saga 2.       Sept 2006 a.       In 2006 BFX buys a leasehold flat. His solicitor advises him that Ground Rent is payable to Landlord-one and Service Charges are payable, but to be wary of the service charges, as he is unable to confirm how they are being administrated. b.       BFX is sent a bill for service charges from PQR Managing Agent. BFX enquires as the legitimacy of the service charges, but is unable to get a satisfactory answer. The service charge requests are not complicit with the required legislation – such as the name of the Landlord. They are served in the name of ABC Management Company Ltd c/o PQR Managing Agents. c.       ABC Management Company has two Directors, both residents of the block in which BFX resides and to which this dispute relates. d.       Landlord-one is absent, except for Ground Rent requests. 3.       2006-2009 a.       Despite written and verbal requests, BFX refuses to pay any service charges until ABC Management Company are properly authorised by Landlord-one – because without such, he has no recourse or way to complain. b.       Demands are not complicit with the legislation. c.       The property was not properly maintained. For example, the lease obligations for an internal redecoration every five years had no been met. The obligations to maintain the exterior of the had not been met, and the timber double glazing was starting to rot quite badly. 4.       2008/2009/2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent Ltd buys out PQR Managing Agent (a sole trader, I believe). They seem to operate interchangeably for a few years, using different headed paper along the way. They seem to be interchangeable. It is the same personnel. 5.       June 2009 a.       TUV Managing Agent LTD, on behalf of ABC Management Company Ltd, file a court claim against BFX. [CLAIM2009] b.       BFX asks them to fully particularise their claim, including asking for details of who authorised them to manage the building and various other pertinent questions. 6.       10th August 2009 a.       BFX sends CPR18 – request for information to TUV Managinig Agent c/o ABC Management Company 7.       2009 a.       Hearing is scheduled for Jan 2010 [CLAIM2009] 8.       February 2010 a.       There is a hearing. b.       Ref: [CLAIM2009] c.       From the Court: IT IS ORDERED THAT the claim be stayed to enable the Parties to endeavour to reach a settlement if no application is made to restore by Tuesday 6th April 2010, the claim be struck out 9.       24th March 2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent sends BFX an agreement to sign, agreeing to pay. BFX does not sign the document. 10.   2010 – 30th or 31st March 2010 a.       BFX attends a meeting with a Director of ABC Management Company and Director of TUV Managing Agent. b.       BFX outlines his position, and suggests a verbal agreement to pay from 2006-2010 once the management of the block is properly administrated – my preference being the ‘RTM route’. c.       The other people at the meeting do not appear to understand. 11.   1st April 2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent on behalf of ABC Management Company write to the Court, asking that the claim be restored, claiming BFX has remained silent. b.       Notice of allocation from the Court, dated 15th April, for a hearing in July. 12.   July 2010 a.       On the day, a lady at the Court informs BFX that TUV Managing Agent has been on the phone, and said that BFX has paid the money and to cancel the hearing. b.       BFX had not paid any money at all. c.       Nothing more is heard of [CLAIM2009] 13.   6th October 2010 a.       ABC Management Co c/o TUV Managing Agent send a letter, after the Freehold Reversion of BFX’s block comes up for sale. TUV Managing Agent outline three options – do nothing, RTM, or buy the freehold. b.       BFX opines that it is not good advice, but is ignored. 14.   December 2010 a.       BFX’s health starts to visibly deteriorate. 15.   Late April 2011 a.       BFX is blue-lighted into the regional hospital, as witnessed by Director of ABC Management Company. 16.   Early May 2011 a.       TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company, commence a new claim against BFX – literally within a week or so of BFX going into Hospital! b.       This is [CLAIM2011] 17.   August 2011 a.       TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company are awarded Judgement in Default. b.       BFX remains critically ill in Hospital. 18.   September 2011 a.       Letter from BFX’s Mortgage Company-One to BFX b.       “We have been advised by TUV Managing Agent that your Ground Rent and Service Charges of £6k-ish has not been paid.” Iy goes on to say pay them. 19.   September 2011 a.       In reference to [CLAIM2011] a letter from TUV Managing Agent to BFX’s Mortgage Company-One states: b.       “As the managing agents of BFX’s Block, I write to advise you that your client, BFX, is in severe arrears and therefore is in breach of his lease. c.       “A County Court Judgement was served on August 2011 in the sum of £6k-ish. A Copy of the Judgement is enclosed for your reference. d.       “I therefore request that this payment is now made in full by your client within 21 days, failure to do so will result in further action being taken and a Section 146Notice [sic] being served on Mr Piggin” 20.   October 2011 a.       Letter from TUV Managing Agent to BFX’s Mortgage Company-One states: b.       “Further to your letter of 25th October 2011, please find below the details of the bank account to make payment of the outstanding service charge and ground rent for the above property” [BFX’s property] c.       Mortgage Company-one makes a payment to ABC Management Co c/o TUV Managing Agent, for the claim amount. 21.   January 2012 a.       Landlord-one sells his freehold to Landlord-two. BFX receives a letter from Landlord-one’s solicitor. It states: b.       “…we write to advise that the benefit of the receipt of the ground rent payable under such Lease has now been transferred to Landlord-two to whom all future payments of ground rent including all arrears and the amount due from 2st January 2012 shall be payable to and whose receipt shall be a full and absolute discharge under such Lease” 22.   February 2012 a.       Landlord-one sells his freehold to Landlord-two. b.       Landlord-two writes to BFX stating that he owes Ground Rent since 2006. c.       That letter from Landlord-two to BFX also states d.       “While we have no wish to disrupt and current workable management arrangements we do have concerns in that respect as the building is not being managed strictly in accordance with the Lease provisions and although we would have no great objection to ABC Management Company Ltd continuing with the management of the structural and communal areas of the building we would be happier if the present informal arrangement, which could in theory be discontinued at any time by any party, could be formalised either by a Deed of Variation being entered into in connection with each individual leaseholder or by a complete Deed of Variation being entere into by all parties. We hope you will support a Deed of Variation and would request your written views in that respect. e.       “We were in direct communication with PQR Managing Agent prior to completion of our purchase and enclose for your information copy letter written to that firm on 11th January 2012. PQR Managing Agent have confirmed they have never received any ground rent payments and they are raising our ‘insurance concerns’ with X Insurer.” f.        The letter referred to above also asks PQR Managing Agent to make certain material disclosures to X Insurer. g.       In his letter to TUV/PQR Managing Agent, dated 11th of Jan, Landlord-two also states, h.       “As management is current [sic] carried out by you on behalf of ABC Management Company Limited, who are not named in the Lease and therefore maintenance obligations are unenforceable against or by that company, you may wish to give consideration to:” It then proposes a) a deed of variation, or b) Landlord-two becomes a client of TUV Property Management, and long term management is done that way. i.         The letter from Landlord-two continues: j.         “Finally, while we appreciate that you are not authorised to collect ground rent and indeed we assume you have not therefore been collecting ground rent, can you please confirm for the avoidance of doubt that you have never collected any ground rent payments from any leaseholder in connection with this building or, if you have collected any ground rent payments, can you please let us have details of such payments.” 23.   October 2012 a.       BFX makes an application for the Judgement to be set-aside, an account of his being hospitalised almost constantly since April 2011. b.       A hearing is scheduled. 24.   January 2013 a.       There is a hearing, the Judgement against BFX is set-aside. TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company do not attend. BFX has until February to file his Defence and Counterclaim, which he does. 25.   March 2013 a.       AQ’s submitted, and hearing scheduled. b.       TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company is ordered to pay the hearing fee. 26.   18th April 2013 a.       Court orders unless TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company pays the fees, the claim shall be struck out. b.       Letter from the Court: BFX’s counterclaim remains listed for May 2013. There is a hearing, and TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company fail to attend. 27.   May 2013 a.       After a hearing, where TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company fail to attend, the Court orders: “The claim be adjourned generally with the liberty to restore on the application of either party.” 28.   2nd half of 2013 and 2014 a.       Various letter from TUV Property Management, and meetings of residents. It is decided by Leaseholders in BFX’s block that we should exercise our ‘right-to-manage’. 29.   17th February 2014 a.       Letter from a solicitor dealing with the RTM progress, it says Landlord-two now has 28 days to file a response. 30.   4th June 2014 a.       BFX Receives a letter from TUV Property Management it states: b.       “Please find enclosed a new standing order form for BFX’s block. c.       “We have opened a new current account for BFX’s block due to the Right to Manage coming into effect in 1st July 2014 d.       “The new standing order is to commence on 1st July 2014…” e.       It continues with pleasantries about cancelling old SO etc. 31.   2nd July 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.3k, the description on the invoice being ‘Account Adjustment: Transfer from previous Management Company’ 32.   2nd July 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.6k, the description on the invoice being ‘Account Adjustment: For period 4th July 2014 – 30th September 2014’ 33.   28th July 20014 (1) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.5k, having added £12. It states ‘Account Adjustment: Title Register’. b.       IT ALSO SHOWS BFX’s FIRST PAYMENT of 1 month’s service charges to ABC RTM Company Ltd as ‘Payment Received’ 34.   28th July 20014 (2) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.8k, having added £360 court fees. It states ‘Account Adjustment: Court Fees’ 35.   28th July 20014 (3) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £4k, having added £120 in court fees 36.   11th August 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX adding another £85. Description: ‘HM Court fee as fee is £205 not £120 – difference’ 37.   August 2014 a.       Following another emergency admission to Hospital for BFX, ABC RTM Company Limited immediately file a claim [CLAIM2014] for alleged arrears from 2011-2014. Approximately £4k. 38.   November 2014 a.       From the Court: Claim [CLAIM2014] stayed until February 2015, by which time the Defendant is to serve his Defence and in default shall file and serve further medical evidence supporting his inability to do the same. 39.   September 2015 a.       Claim stayed until end of October 2015 40.   November 2015 a.       Claim stayed until Jan 2016 41.   8th January 2016 a.       BFX makes an application for summary judgement [of CLAIM2014] that the claim be struck out, as it is a relitigation of [CLAIM2011] 42.   Feb 2016 a.       Transferred to local Court. 43.   31st March 2016 a.       There was a hearing of my application (I think) b.       From the Court, re [CLAIM2014] c.       IT IS ORDERED THAT d.       The hearing of today’s date be adjourned e.       The Claimant to file and serve a fully Particulars (detailed) Particulars of claim [sic] to set out the basis to the claim, entitlement of the Claimant to recover sums from the Defendant, detailing sums recovered and any outstanding payment plus other details which the Claimand may advise to address by 22 april 2016 f.        The Defendant to file and serve a detailed defence addressing the Particulars of Claim in paragraph 2 above by 12 may 2016 g.       If the Defendant wishes the application of today’s date to be relisted (upon consideration of the fully particularised Particulars of Claim), the Defendant should write to the court, at the same time as filing a defence, with a copy of this order, asking for the Court to relist the application for hearing with an estimated length of 1 hour 30 minutes (30 minutes of it being reading time). In the event that the application is relisted, both parties to file and serve detailed statements addressing the subject matter of the application 7 clear days before the hearing. 44.   17th May 2016 a.       From the court: b.       “IT IS ORDERED THAT The Defendants application be relisted in accordance with the order made on the 31st March 2016 on Monday 27th June at 15:30pm with an elh of 30 minutes,not to be heard by telephone” [sic]” 45.   June 2016 a.       I think there was a hearing, possibly. I am looking for the paperwork. I attended the hearing directly from a different regional Hospital to the usual one, where I was being treated for a brain infection. We got our heads bashed together by a clearly infuriated Judge, Judge advised ABC RTM c/o TUV Managing Agents to get a solicitor, tells BFX to be clearer in what he says. Nothing further was heard. Until… 46.   7th April 2017 a.       BFX has an invoice for 1066.00 from TUV Managing Agent c/o ABC RTM Company Ltd 47.   August 2017 a.       BFX mortgage sold from ‘Mortgage Company-one’ to ‘Mortgage Company-two’ 48.   13th September 2017 a.       BFX received an invoice for £5,000 for his share for new windows to BFX’s block. It seemed complicit with s20 LTA 1985 etc. BFX pays £5k. b.       There was a lot of confusion during this process, I am pinning down the paperwork, but it was paid. The total invoice was not split as per the lease – Leaseholders were asked for funds on a per window basis, but the Lease says the total should be summed and divided by the number of units. c.       N.B. BFX’s flat is in a conservation area, and the price reflects expensive windows, as specified by local planners. There were other attempts to put in cheap, nasty windows, but BFX was able to stop this by making informal representations to the local Borough Council – who in turn contacted TUV Managing Agents, who in turn eventually put in a proper planning application for proper windows, which was approved. d.       There was a lot of confusion during this process, I am pinning down the paperwork, but it was paid. The total invoice was not as per the lease – Leaseholders were asked for funds on a per window basis, but the Lease says the total should be summed and divided by the number of units. 49.   12th October 2017 a.       BFX receives invoice for service charges (or statement of account): £4,800 approx. No payments are made by BFX 50.   25h September 2018 a.       BFX receives an invoice (or statement of account) for a total of £492. b.       It appears they have decided not to collect this amount 51.   March 2020 a.       Claim2020 from ABC RTM Company Limited c/o Company Director (not TUV Property Management) for £890 plus £70 Court fee. BFX has not been paying his fees because the management of the block is terrible.
    • Yes I know.  We would like the story posted up plainly on a post in a new thread with no attachment simply a step-by-step account of what happened and what led to the litigation. I think we can understand why this thread has gone on for 18 pages
    • I think he's hoping the attached pdf would be a satisfactory starting point for a new thread?
    • Please start a new thread so that you can post up a nice brief bullet pointed chronology of what happened which led to the litigation.
    • Hope it all goes well for her CB, let us know how she gets on.
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2745 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

I'm not sure if my problem is relevant to this site but I don't know who else to contact, so here's hoping someone can help.

This week I got questioned by the police about shoplifting in Superdrug last week. I was very confused as I didn't really get what the police officer was saying at first. I thought he was asking me if I had seen someone shoplifting. It turns out he was asking me if Ihad shoplifted. I was astounded and asked him why he thought I had done it. He then produced still images of me in Superdrug and asked me if I recognised the person in the photo. It was a little grainy and at first I was in doubt but then certain things became familiar. Apparently, because I had been at the make-up section for 40 minutes I was the most likely person to steal over £300 worth of make-up items. It wasn't just 1 of this and 1 of that, it was up to 8 of a single item! There was approximately 50 items taken. I told the officer that I had been looking for a certain lipstick and had been testing shades close to the one I wanted. He asked me if I had purchased anything and I said yes...I even made him come and look at the make-up I had purchased (purchased on my credit card and used the Superdrug loyalty card with all my details on). He then asked me if I would come to the station the following day for an interview and to watch the CCTV footage of me in Superdrug, that was within the 24 hours that the items were meant to be taken, which I agreed to do.

 

That night I hardly slept. I was in shock and as confused as hell. How can they accuse me of shoplifting if they have me on CCTV? The thoughts of that day went through my head time and again in a confused jumble keeping me from any kind of useful rest.

The following day I turned up at the station early because I couldn't sit around and wait any more. The PC met me at the door and told me he had the CCTV footage but unfortunately in was in VHS format. Not thinking about the whole of what he said, just the fact that he had the footage, I heaved a sigh of relief and said 'Thank god! I can go then!' He looked at me for a second then said 'I think you had better come and see for yourself'.

 

I was lead to an interview room and the recorder was set up. While he was loading the DVDs, the PC told me that the interview room was used in major crimes (no pressure there!).

 

Once the machine was recording the officer read me my rights and informed me I wasn't under arrest and could leave at any time and asked me if I wanted a solicitor, which I declined as I figured I hadn't done anything wrong so wasn't necessary. He then turned on the VCR combi TV and I flashed onto screen just walking into Superdrug with my handbag over my shoulder and a basket in my hand. He stopped the footage and asked me if I recognised the person on the footage. I confirmed it was me and he then pressed play. The footage isn't the best but it is clear enough to make out it was me. It shows me in the make-up aisle appearing to take things off the shelf fiddling with them (the images don't show features or hand details as it is of less than excellent quality) and then appearing to put them back. The CCTV camera is over the entrance pointing straight up the make-up aisle which is the first aisle in the store. Directly underneath the camera, at the very beginning of the row of make-up stands, is a member of staff stocking a new make-up display. She is within 1-4m of me. My handbag is not meant to be a shoulder bag but for convenience sake I usually use it that way. That means that when I have the bag over my shoulder the opening is under my armpit and hard to access without slipping one handle off my shoulder.

 

While watching the footage I asked details about the crime. According to Superdrug it happened sometime between opening time on the Monday morning and sometime Tuesday morning. I had arrived at the store at 11.06am on the Monday. What an awful lot of footage to sit through...not just my boring 40 minutes but approximately 12 hours of footage.

 

As I was moving up and down the aisle, apparently, reaching for items and putting them back the PC was asking me what each item was. In some cases I could answer that it was a lipstick tester, but considering I also bought mascara I wasn't always that sure. I told him what I remember of my time there, but I was a bit vague in places. What I remember specifically from that day is that I didn't have anything to do so had time to just browse and take as much time as I wanted. I also remember the alarm going off in the store and a lady had turned round and looked at the member of staff who was under the camera stacking the display. The member of staff told the lady to 'just ignore it, it does it all the time'.

 

The PC couldn't understand how anyone could spend the best part of 40 minutes looking for a lipstick (had the PC been a female the question wouldn't have arisen) and all I could say was it was a good job that I wasn't in a book shop...where 40 minutes could turn into hours!

 

After watching 20 out of the 40 minutes of the footage the officer asked me if I wanted to watch the rest of the footage as he had seen it twice and the next 20 minutes were much the same. Saying to him that I had been there and experienced it first hand I didn't need to watch the rest. He then switched off the footage, asked me if I had anything to add and informed me that he was going to talk to his superiors and Superdrug to see if they were going to proceed with a prosecution. I was stunned, there was nothing on that footage that showed me putting things in my handbag, in fact, there is no way I could fit approx 50 items in my handbag. If I did have the items in my bag then how the heck did manage to get my rather large (but mostly empty) purse out at the checkout when I went to pay for the items in the basket. I put these questions to the PC but he really didn't seem bothered. He had told me that he was meant to be neutral but that isn't the impression I got. He seemed impatient for me to not waste his precious time and to stop asking pointless (in his mind) questions. I felt judged and got a really bad feeling when he said that he was in doubt it would go further due to the bad quality of the footage.

 

At the door of the station I asked if anyone else was being questioned and he said no, just me. I asked if he had seen the whole of the footage from the Monday opening until staff realised items were missing on the Tuesday morning. He said no and he wasn't about to. The PC said that Superdrug security had watched the footage and had just sent the footage of me as I had been in there the longest. I asked for the whole footage and he said that it was down to Superdrug and they wouldn't release the footage. I asked if they would allow an independent person to view the footage and he said no and to not even bother with asking. By this time I was in tears. I asked him to tell Superdrug to look at the whole footage again...not just my bit but the WHOLE of it, because somewhere on that footage is the person/people that did it. He didn't even bother to answer. As he went back in the station he told me he would inform me in a couple of days as to whether they would be proceeding with a case or not.

 

I now wish I had seen the rest of the footage. I wish that I had asked if there was footage of me at the checkout. Unfortunately, my rather slow and numb thought processes didn't kick in fully until I had left.

 

I had been asked if I had a receipt of my purchases in Superdrug and normally I refuse receipts as they clutter up my handbag. The following day I was thinking about it and thought to have a look in the recycling...just in case. Success! There it was. I obviously had a record of the transaction on my credit card statement but I needed to have an itemised account of what I had bought. I called the PC and left a message informing him of my find. A couple of hours later he returned my call and acknowledged the receipt find. He then went on to inform me that because there wasn't enough evidence the police were not going to prosecute. I think I was meant to feel relief at this but immediately the though occurred that even though they were dropping it, it didn't mean they thought I was innocent. I relayed this to the officer and he said that Superdrug weren't happy.

 

By this stage I had popped like a pressure cooker. I was angry, humiliated and felt victimised. Why were they so quick to try and damn me but point blank refuse to give me a chance to show them that I didn't do it?

 

I have lived in my town the best part of 45 years. I know an awful lot of people (quite a few through the charity shop that I volunteered in for 2 years). I have friends, neighbours and acquaintances in most of the shops. This is probably one of the most demeaning things to ever happen to me and I want the chance to vindicate myself.

 

So after all of that, does anyone know who I should contact to mediate between Superdrug and myself with a view for someone to take my bag and fill it up with the items taken, while in full view of the camera and staff member, then to go to the checkout with the items I purchased in a basket and retrieve my purse from under all the stolen goods?

 

It is a simple solution and the only way I can think to prove my innocence. I just don't know who or how to go about it.

I obviously can't go into Superdrug now because if they decided to refuse to talk to me and ban me from their stores, the humiliation would probably give me a heart attack. I can't seem to find a phone number to their HQ in Croyden, just a postal address. I am a bit hesitant to send a letter as it may pass through several hands before being bought to the attention of the right person (I don't even know who that would be). I just need clear guidance as my mind is a jumble and am having difficulty getting back on track (though you can probably tell that from my rambling diatribe).

 

I really hope someone can advise me.

 

Thank you

S

Edited by sdv2712

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sdv

 

Welcome to CAG

 

Could you add spaces to create paragraphs please, so it's easier to read.

 

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

 

Please let us know how your problem has been resolved, it could help fellow Caggers.

 

Thread has been moved to the correct forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, my mind works faster than my fingers and I get carried away.

 

Edited now :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sdv, what a nightmare situation! I'm sure someone here will be along soon to help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aww thank you Lily. Nightmare is one way of putting it. I'm devastated.

 

Thank you so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can imagine how devastated you are sdv. The folk on here will help you sort things out, they've helped me a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, honey, I certainly hope so. Thank you so much for the reassurance, it is a tonic.

 

It is heartening to see that you have had help and gives me hope for my own situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll feel better as the days go by. At first it seems like the end of the world, but it really isn't. You wont see that just yet, but you will :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an unpleasant experience to have gone through. From a dispassionate point of view, one can see how the situation arose - but it's the way it was handled that has caused you distress.

 

There's a bit missing from your story, and it would be helpful if you could fill in the blanks. Were you stopped in Superdrug, or how did the police make contact?

 

The police will say that they have a duty to investigate, which they did, and decided to take no action. This means that you are innocent in the eyes of the law. Superdrug have to accept that, whether they like it or not. The fact is that if their security staff and equipment were up to scratch, they'd have caught the thief, and not wrongly accused an innocent person.

 

As to what you can do about it, I think that the best course of action is to write a formal letter of complaint to Superdrug's head office. What you should put in it will depend to an extent on what happened at first.

 

I have to say, though, that I do not think you will get a satisfactory response from Superdrug - but sending the letter will make you feel better, and enable you to put the matter behind you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sdv

 

Write a Formal Letter of Complaint mark it as such. Explain whats happened, how your a regular shopper, how they have upset you through the allegations they've made, tell them what you want them to do and that your considering further action.

 

Send it to :-

 

Joey Wat, Managing Director

joey.wat@uk.aswatson.com

 

Some tips:-

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1242161/How--write-letter-complaint.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.ceoemail.com/ Have a scroll down - superdrug Chief Executive Officer email etc listed

 

Twitter is also a good place to complain & usually get speedy responses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ScarletPimpernel

Site Team

 

 

 

 

Cagger since

Mar 2007

Posts

5,453

Re: Wrongly accused by Superdrug...

What an unpleasant experience to have gone through. From a dispassionate point of view, one can see how the situation arose - but it's the way it was handled that has caused you distress.

 

There's a bit missing from your story, and it would be helpful if you could fill in the blanks. Were you stopped in Superdrug, or how did the police make contact?

 

The police will say that they have a duty to investigate, which they did, and decided to take no action. This means that you are innocent in the eyes of the law. Superdrug have to accept that, whether they like it or not. The fact is that if their security staff and equipment were up to scratch, they'd have caught the thief, and not wrongly accused an innocent person.

 

As to what you can do about it, I think that the best course of action is to write a formal letter of complaint to Superdrug's head office. What you should put in it will depend to an extent on what happened at first.

 

I have to say, though, that I do not think you will get a satisfactory response from Superdrug - but sending the letter will make you feel better, and enable you to put the matter behind you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

A policeman came round on Tuesday evening of this week. He turned up out of the blue, in fact, when my son answered the door and said it was a policeman I accused him of winding me up thinking it was actually one of his friends.

 

The police as a whole may say that I am innocent but that particular PC inferred that the only reason I was 'being let off' was due to lack of conclusive evidence, he also added that Superdrug were not happy happy which added to the burden.

 

I may well be banging my head against a brick wall but I have to try. I just want someone to acknowledge that I am not in the wrong, I don't care if it is only verbally rather than in print.

 

Thank you for your advice, I truly appreciate any help.

Edited by sdv2712
incorrect wording

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi sdv

 

Write a Formal Letter of Complaint mark it as such. Explain whats happened, how your a regular shopper, how they have upset you through the allegations they've made, tell them what you want them to do and that your considering further action.

 

 

 

 

Wow! Thank you. I was looking for security department, never thought to go directly to the MD.

 

As soon as I finish work I will get on that.

 

You are a star, thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a scroll down - superdrug Chief Executive Officer email etc listed

 

Twitter is also a good place to complain & usually get speedy responses

 

The CEO, this only gets better.

 

I just can't thank you all enough. Even if it all comes to nothing and I am still prohibited from shopping in my local Superdrug, I will know that I have tried my best.

 

You are all amazing, I would never have thought of any of this. Mind you, I have been feeling like a dog chasing its' tail, so it is excellent to get some clarity.

 

Thank you all again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I know how you feel. Part of my ongoing complaint with Unison is the lovely visit I had from a copper on a Friday afternoon. By this point Unison knew just how badly they had let me down, but of course Unions will never admit this. I had been talking to one of the office staff, that morning, and as we had spoken several times, when she asked me about my illness, PTSD, I told her that three years ago I felt like murdering the woman who had done this to me. This copper who turned up accused me of making threats to murder the Unison staff! I was astounded, gobsmacked - and after he left, warning me never to ring the office again or he would come back and arrest me, I was livid.

 

My complaint with Unison is now at the London office, and I complained to the police - after all, I had been accused or making threats to kill, and I hadn't done it. Unison say they record all their calls, I was furious the tape wasn't listened to first. I made such a stink about it that the police decided to listen to the tape, but it suddenly disappeared at the Unison end. Police say they willl take no further action. Now that is not good enough for me - I want it in writing that if I apply for a job with an enhanced CRB this will not be on it. And until I get that they will keep getting letter after letter reminding them.

 

What a horrible experience for youj. You go and kick who ever you need to where it hurts. X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It speaks volumes that the shop security staff didn't try to stop you at the time; the police must have traced you through your purchase.Make a formal complaint to Superdrug's CEO - keep it concise, and include what you want by way of resolution - but don't be surprised if you get a fairly anodyne response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh I know how you feel. Part of my ongoing complaint with Unison is the lovely visit I had from a copper on a Friday afternoon. By this point Unison knew just how badly they had let me down, but of course Unions will never admit this. I had been talking to one of the office staff, that morning, and as we had spoken several times, when she asked me about my illness, PTSD, I told her that three years ago I felt like murdering the woman who had done this to me. This copper who turned up accused me of making threats to murder the Unison staff! I was astounded, gobsmacked - and after he left, warning me never to ring the office again or he would come back and arrest me, I was livid.

 

My complaint with Unison is now at the London office, and I complained to the police - after all, I had been accused or making threats to kill, and I hadn't done it. Unison say they record all their calls, I was furious the tape wasn't listened to first. I made such a stink about it that the police decided to listen to the tape, but it suddenly disappeared at the Unison end. Police say they willl take no further action. Now that is not good enough for me - I want it in writing that if I apply for a job with an enhanced CRB this will not be on it. And until I get that they will keep getting letter after letter reminding them.

 

What a horrible experience for youj. You go and kick who ever you need to where it hurts. X

 

How awful. Persistence pays off, if only for the fact they just want to get rid of you.

 

I did giggle at the 'kick where it hurts' bit though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It speaks volumes that the shop security staff didn't try to stop you at the time; the police must have traced you through your purchase.Make a formal complaint to Superdrug's CEO - keep it concise, and include what you want by way of resolution - but don't be surprised if you get a fairly anodyne response.

 

I wish they had stopped me at the time and then no ones time would have been so wasted and I wouldn't be so stressed about things.

 

The police had no need to trace me, Superdrug had all my personal detail on my loyalty/bonus card.

 

No harm in trying though, eh? I will try putting my point across and give them the opportunity to see if it was at all possible for me to do this. If it is still inconclusive at the end then by all means ban me from the store. More than anything I want the person/s who did actually do the crime caught, there should be no better way of clearing my name and for Superdrug to get compensation for what was taken. I have asked friends to keep an ear out for someone selling make-up, just in case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would put in a formal complaint against the Officer to. He did indeed have a duty to investigate a reported crime - so why didn't he?!!

 

He pulled in one person on, well, its not even flimsy evidence, its not evidence at all - a woman spending 40 mins in the makeup department? like that never happens! is not seen at any stage pocketing items? And then the officer refuses to check the rest of the footage?

 

I have to say, the amount of items stolen, that sounds like either an organised gang were involved, so several people were involved, or its an inside job by a member of staff, maybe it was even a Security Officer, hence the flimsiest of evidence being sent to the Police of someone who is innocent....


[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Email is now sent to Mr J Wat. Fingers crossed he climbs down from his lofty height and acknowledges it and gives me the chance to redress the situation.

 

I will update as and when. I will even post his email on here (should he bother to respond).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The police as a whole may say that I am innocent but that particular PC inferred that the only reason I was 'being let off' was due to lack of conclusive evidence, he also added that Superdrug were not happy happy which added to the burden.

 

 

So much for the PC and his alleged independence.

 

Superdrug gave him a video that showed nothing, you co-operated, it still showed nothing, he still wants to believe superdrug despite there not being room in your bag to fit the items that they allege that you stole!

 

Even superdrug must have realised before they gave the tape to the police - presumably they looked at it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would put in a formal complaint against the Officer to. He did indeed have a duty to investigate a reported crime - so why didn't he?!!

 

He pulled in one person on, well, its not even flimsy evidence, its not evidence at all - a woman spending 40 mins in the makeup department? like that never happens! is not seen at any stage pocketing items? And then the officer refuses to check the rest of the footage?

 

I have to say, the amount of items stolen, that sounds like either an organised gang were involved, so several people were involved, or its an inside job by a member of staff, maybe it was even a Security Officer, hence the flimsiest of evidence being sent to the Police of someone who is innocent....

 

Hi Caledfwlch,

 

In all fairness the officer isn't at fault about me being the only person being pulled in as Superdrug only sent my images, my details and CCTV footage containing my 40 minutes to him so their sucurity is at fault. Yes, I know it is extremely flimsy, hence the fact it wasn't taken any further. The officer also said that he was meant to remain neutral. I got the distinct impression that he didn't. How do you convince someone who has seen all kinds of bad things not to be cynical and judgmental? One example was, I asked him that what kind of person steals all of that and still uses their credit card and loyalty card (with all personal detail in the stores' database)? His reply was that he had come across all kinds of stupid people. Taken aback I asked him if I came across as that stupid and he said he had seen it before.Talk about insulting.

 

That conversation happened on the phone about two minutes before he told me that the investigation wasn't going any further. When faced with that mentality you may as well bang your head against a brick wall.

 

The store doesn't have security per se as it isn't a very large place. There is only one entrance/exit. Occasionally a member of staff will be on duty near the exit to grab anyone should the need arise and also there are the alarms (though they are useless when items don't have the security tag on them) and, of course, the outdated CCTV.

 

At the end of the email I sent to Mr Wat I recommended that they upgraded their CCTV equipment from VHS to Digital. If it was all up to date then none of this would be pertinent as they would have seen clearly what I was doing, or not doing as the case may be.

 

I agree with your opinion that it is more than one person or a member of staff (though if it was the staff then they would have to account for a time lapse in the CCTV footage if they knew how to turn it off. They would be more likely to steal from the storage room where there is no coverage). The way the camera is positioned would show any furtive movement from one person but if there were two then person number one could stand with their back to the camera, at right angles to the display so that person number two could reach in front of of person one to the display and take what they want.

 

How I would willingly risk eye strain to watch the whole footage from first opening time on the Monday to when they realised the items were missing on the Tuesday. morning.

 

Thank you for your support, I can't tell you how much I appreciate it.

 

S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So much for the PC and his alleged independence.

 

Superdrug gave him a video that showed nothing, you co-operated, it still showed nothing, he still wants to believe superdrug despite there not being room in your bag to fit the items that they allege that you stole!

 

Even superdrug must have realised before they gave the tape to the police - presumably they looked at it?

 

Hi Grumpy (lol),

 

I am assuming that Superdrug didn't check the whole footage in Monday am/Tuesday am timeline. I was in there at 11am on the Monday, by that stage they would have watched approximately 2 hours worth of footage. I got bored of watching after only 20 minutes of a potential 40 minutes video footage so up to about 11 hours would be a torture (even though I would be more than willing to watch it right now!). It is all a bit convenient for my taste.

 

In the letter to the MD I never once threatened or gave a hint that I would take it further, allowing him a chance to redeem themselves in my eyes. Should he chose to ignore or whitewash things then I will go to anyone who will listen. It would be in his best interest to humour me, especially as all I want is a sorry and for it to be MY choice as to whether I wish to shop there or not. They can keep any guilt bribes, like vouchers, as I have purchased all I am ever going to purchase from Superdrug.

 

I apologise for sounding high handed, that isn't really me, but I am a bit chuffed off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O/T If they object to you spending 40 minutes in one area of the store, they clearly don't know their market. They spend millions on advertising to attract you to their store, you do exactly that, go to the store and what do they do create a 'nightmare situation'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
O/T If they object to you spending 40 minutes in one area of the store, they clearly don't know their market. They spend millions on advertising to attract you to their store, you do exactly that, go to the store and what do they do create a 'nightmare situation'.

 

Hahaha!

 

A very valid point. It's not as if I spent a couple of pound. I spent nearly £40. Seems pointless if I was allegedly stealing over £300 worth of make-up, especially as most of my purchases were make-up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...